mike omalley said:Where did that come from?
Why do you guys hate America?
I’m still scratching my head trying to figure out why she would want the job. She just had a baby with special needs, one of her other babies is having a baby, she spent her life in rural Alaska and hubby is a fisherman. Like they’re going to be happy living inside the beltway? This town will eat them alive.
-Brian
Ric Golding said:I'm surprised they haven't just let you go since rural areas tend to suckle at the tax teet of urban areas. If the eastern shore or western Maryland wanted to secede, I'd be happy to let them go. Let's keep our tax dollars here to spend.
Hell, I've been for Southern Illinois succeeding from Chicago for 30 years.
-Brian
They’re afraid we wouldn’t feed them.
As I’m sure the Eastern Shore and Western Maryland would be all too happy to do if they could. Much prettier scenery and a lot more relaxed.
I’d be willing to bet more welfare checks are distributed in the DC metro area that all of the Eastern shore and western MD, combined.
Ken Brunt said:
As I'm sure the Eastern Shore and Western Maryland would be all too happy to do if they could. Much prettier scenery and a lot more relaxed.I’d be willing to bet more welfare checks are distributed in the DC metro area that all of the Eastern shore and western MD, combined.
You’d probably lose that bet. Here’s some fact based postings on urban and rural poverty
"Myth: The majority of the poor live in inner-city neighborhoods.* While poverty rates are highest in inner cities, only 23 percent of those in poverty live there. Overall, poverty rates in rural areas have been and continue to be consistently higher than those found in urban areas, which includes inner cities. In this case, rural areas have the second highest poverty rates of 16.3 percent when compared to urban areas (RSS Task Force 1993:32). In 1990, there were 9 million people in rural areas living in poverty; nearly one in five rural residents. In 1993, in the North Central region, the rural poverty rate stood at 13.6 percent, whereas the poverty rate for urban areas was only 11.4 percent.
Myth: Poverty in rural areas looks much like that found in urban areas. While poverty exists in both urban and rural areas, the characteristics of those living in poverty in these two places are distinctly different. Not only do rural areas have consistently higher rates of poverty than urban places, but those living in poverty in rural areas are more likely to be white and living in two-adult households. Rural areas also have higher rates of persistent poverty and they are dispersed over a larger geographic area."
From this site, if you’re interested
http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/dispatch/pov_myths.htm
It’s remarkable that McCain has chosen a VP candidate who advocates that Alaska leave the United States–or who at least did. She was a member of the Party in the 90s at least. She hated the US enough that she wanted to secede from it. Nice! Just what you want in a president. Remeber al that fap about Obama not wearing a flag pin?
"Persistent poverty tends to be found in particular regions such as Appalachia and the South. In the North Central region, areas of persistent poverty are located primarily in North Dakota, South Dakota and Missouri. "
I don’t think the Eastern shore or western MD are in any of those areas. Maybe close to Appalachia, but the Eastern shore or western MD doesn’t look poverty stricken to me. Quite the opposite given the amount of new construction going on in both places. I see a lot of DC commuters heading in both directions.
I did not mention poverty but just talking about the redistribution of tax dollars from wealthier areas to areas less so. The DC suburbs are among the wealthiest in the country with Montgomery and Howard counties in Md and Arlington, Fairfax and Loudon in Va. There is a major outflow of tax dollars. Yes, those areas are quite pretty but not a hotbed of high income jobs.
-Brian
I have one question and one comment.
Question: have the Palins actually said their daughter is going to keep the baby? For a teenager to have a child is one thing; to keep the child is another. I’m curious - does anyone know?
Comment: people who support secession do not axiomatically “hate” the nation they want to secede from. Western Australia is a case in point. There was an active secession movement in the late 60s and early 70s. The argument for secession was economic, along the lines of “Western Australia produces a disproportionate share of Australia’s wealth, but a disproportionate amount of that wealth goes elsewhere. We want a bigger piece of the pie.”
Does that mean the Western Australians who supported the secession movement hated Australia? By no means! They certainly perceived inequity, and blustered and postured until they got a better deal. All of us who live here benefited from their efforts.
If someone asked me to nominate a place where the people hate the US, I can truly say Alaska would never have occurred to me.
Maybe we could sell Alaska back to the Russians for a pretty penny. I’m sure those folks would love borscht and Vodka and it would help take care of that huge national debt.
-Brian
Met the daughter yet?
(http://reymarz.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/juno_shenanigan.jpg)
Perfect example of the Rights “Just Say No” ideas about sex and family planning :lol:
Yeah, fifty cents worth of latex goes a long way to preventing these things.
-Brian
Dave Healy said:Sure, that could be true, although here's a quote from the Party's founder, Joseph Vogler:
Comment: people who support secession do not axiomatically "hate" the nation they want to secede from. Western Australia is a case in point. There was an active secession movement in the late 60s and early 70s. The argument for secession was economic, along the lines of "Western Australia produces a disproportionate share of Australia's wealth, but a disproportionate amount of that wealth goes elsewhere. We want a bigger piece of the pie."
“the fires of Hell are glaciers compared to my hate for the American Government, and I won’t be buried under their damn flag” (see http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/2/02123/20693/857/582911) There’s more at the link: the quote came from an oral history interview with Vogler which is in the archive of the U of alaska library
And on the AIP website he’s quoted saying he has no use for America and “her damned institutions.”
Was she really a member of the Party? The evidence is two claims by AIP members that she was a member in the mid 90s. It may be that they are lying.Some skepticism is certainly in order. She did address their convention last year, and praised the organization. That does not mean she was a member. I’m waiting for more evidence
This just in–a 3d AIP member says Palin was a member:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/another-aip-off.html
Brian Donovan said:
I did not mention poverty but just talking about the redistribution of tax dollars from wealthier areas to areas less so. The DC suburbs are among the wealthiest in the country with Montgomery and Howard counties in Md and Arlington, Fairfax and Loudon in Va. There is a major outflow of tax dollars. Yes, those areas are quite pretty but not a hotbed of high income jobs.-Brian
I imagine the outflow is going to all that federal Highway reconstruction down there for the past 8 years…
Well, mike, if its on the dailykos and backed up by an abc blog, it must be true, right? Those are objective news sources, right?
And now the Alaska board of elections has confirmed that Todd Palin, her husband, was a member of the AIP from 1995-2002. (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/todd_palin_was_registered_memb.php)
Here’s that quote again from the Party’s founder, Joseph Vogler:
“the fires of Hell are glaciers compared to my hate for the American Government, and I won’t be buried under their damn flag”
Nice choice McCain. The woman has a 4 month old Down’s syndrome baby and a pregnant 7 year old daughter, and she decides that the way to take care of her family is to run for VP. Family values!
Not my kind anyway
Steve Featherkile said:Well Steve, three members of the AIP have said she was a member. Her husband, according to the Alaska board of elections, was a registered member. Now it's possible those three AIP members are lying. It's possible the Alaska board of elections is lying. It's possible ABC's reporter is lying. It's possible, but how likely? There's video footage of the VP of the Party claiming she was a member. Here's the video, he mentions her at about 6 minutes
Well, mike, if its on the dailykos and backed up by an abc blog, it must be true, right? Those are objective news sources, right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHFY1otOWjQ
And he says
“Our current governor, we mentioned at the last conference, the one we were hoping would get elected, Sarah Palin, did get elected. There’s a joke, she’s a pretty good looking gal, there’s a joke goes around we’re the coldest state with the hottest governor. And there was a lot of talk about her moving up. She was an AIP member before she got the job as a mayor of a small town – that was a non-partisan job. But you get along to go along – she eventually joined the Republican Party, where she had all kinds of problems with their ethics, and well, I won’t go into that. She also had about an 80% approval rating, and is pretty well sympathetic to her former membership.”
In his subsequent remark, he mentioned Palin again and talked about how the AIP was “infiltrating” the republican party
There is video footage of her addressing the AIP convention–it’s on youtube. She has nothing but praise for the party. I guess the youtube video could be a fake?
What do you think?
Oy vey, This issue is beginning to look like a slow motion train wreck…
(http://www.forbeslibrary.org/special/images/trainwreck.jpg)
Just to stir the pot a little, lest we suffer from imbalance…
Nancy Pelosi has five children and she’s in politics in a high demand job!
And…it would seem that San Francisco has already seceded from the Union or at least its laws.
touché!!